• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Group A - Australia, South Africa, Scotland, Holland

Prince EWS

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
mikeW said:
Hayden nor Hodge deserve to be dropped. Watson has been given a free ride for far too long. Symonds is an all-rounder so him replacing Watson shouldn't affect team balance. If Symonds isnt fit enough to bowl why is he even playing? Why risk him this early in the tournament when he can be eased back into things against lesser teams like Ireland, Bangladesh, Kenya/England?
Click to expand...
Because if Australia lose, it could mean the difference between them making the semi finals and not.
 
Prince EWS

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
mikeW said:
Drop Watson for Symonds. Instead the selectors insist on playing favourites.
Click to expand...
I never really understood the problem with selectors "playing favourites" as such. I'd much rather the selectors pick who they thought would do the job in the future than pick someone they had little confidence in just because his recent performances were good.
 
FaaipDeOiad

FaaipDeOiad

Hall of Fame Member
mikeW said:
Hayden nor Hodge deserve to be dropped. Watson has been given a free ride for far too long. Symonds is an all-rounder so him replacing Watson shouldn't affect team balance. If Symonds isnt fit enough to bowl why is he even playing? Why risk him this early in the tournament when he can be eased back into things against lesser teams like Ireland, Bangladesh, Kenya/England?
Click to expand...
Symonds is a totally different sort of player, and I'm sure you know that.

Anyway, Watson hasn't been given a "free ride" at all. He's been a consistent performer when fit for quite a while now. Since the 2005 Ashes, his record is 506 runs @ 33.73 and 33 wickets @ 23.97 with an economy rate of 5.14. His average with the bat is a good deal better at the top of the order, too. That's consistent however you look at it, and he's earned his place in the team as much as any other player around.

He was picked on potential early in his career of course, but not any more. More importantly, during that period he's made the team a fair bit more solid bowling-wise when he's been fit, because he offers a genuine 5th bowler option rather than a collection of part-timers. Throw in Symonds versatility as well and Australia's bowling looks a hell of a lot better with he and Watson in the team than it would with one of them and Hodge.

Hodge has played well, but he came into the team to fill an injury spot, and nobody else has played badly enough to be dropped, so he's the one to miss out. It's not as though he actually warrants a place in the team ahead of any of the specialist bats.
 
Matt79

Matt79

Hall of Fame Member
FaaipDeOiad said:
Anyway, Watson hasn't been given a "free ride" at all. He's been a consistent performer when fit for quite a while now. Since the 2005 Ashes, his record is 506 runs @ 33.73 and 33 wickets @ 23.97 with an economy rate of 5.14. His average with the bat is a good deal better at the top of the order, too. That's consistent however you look at it, and he's earned his place in the team as much as any other player around.

He was picked on potential early in his career of course, but not any more. More importantly, during that period he's made the team a fair bit more solid bowling-wise when he's been fit, because he offers a genuine 5th bowler option rather than a collection of part-timers.
Click to expand...
You must have a macro to replicate that whenever required by now - feels like you have to say it daily in at least three threads... Absolutely agree btw and it should be repeated as often as is necessary tbh.
 
L

Laurrz

International Debutant
Aussies batting first

GRRRRRR bad toss to lose IMO .. woulda liked to bowl first
 
Last edited:
L

Laurrz

International Debutant
its gonna be hard to maintain Saffer batting lienup when they come out to bat.... whatever the total is...
 
FaaipDeOiad

FaaipDeOiad

Hall of Fame Member
Batting first is usually a disadvantage with these early starts, but obviously if you play well enough you can win from either position. Crucial early period now against Pollock and Ntini. Need to get through the new ball, hopefully with Gilchrist intact.
 
Prince EWS

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
FaaipDeOiad said:
Batting first is usually a disadvantage with these early starts, but obviously if you play well enough you can win from either position. Crucial early period now against Pollock and Ntini. Need to get through the new ball, hopefully with Gilchrist intact.
Click to expand...
It's situations like this where I really think Gilchrist would be better utilised down the order a bit.
 
GIMH

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
Business is about to pick up. It's gonna be a good old-fashioned slobberknocker.

Hope both lose tbh
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top